Wow... this thread has unwittingly ruffled lots of feathers....
Adding my hopefully balanced 2cents to the fray...
I still believe that different tiers of photographers exist to serve different tiers of clients. Why high-earning photographers can command the big bucks they earn is because they know their clients well enough and are able to differentiate themselves (consciously or otherwise) such that the clients are willing to pay more for the perceived value on top of photographs.
What are these perceived values? Reliability, comfort, skills, peace and prestige are some common values that are associated with the branding of a professional/company regardless of the industry they are in. One might argue that these perceived values are not worth the difference in prices but obviously, some consumers are willing to pay for them whether these values are real or perceived. One might also argue that what affect other different industries do not affect us but this is not entirely true. The specifics and details may be different but the underlying fundamentals still remain. E.g. Do people pay extra for peace of mind? A traveller may be willing to pay additional by flying a full-fledged national airline with a reputation of almost zero cancellations than to fly a budget airline with a reputation of many cancellations. Why? Because that traveller feels that the peace of mind is worth the price difference. Does it mean that the full-fledged national airline will not cancel on the traveller's trip but the budget airline will? No, but to the traveller who values peace of mind, this perceived peace of mind of not worrying about the hassle of cancelled flights is incentive to fork out that extra. Is it worth it for the traveller? Only the traveller knows.
On photographers who offer cheap rates, it is actually one way of entering a market with a low natural barrier of entry by disrupting the market. <<Cue in the hypermarkets who put mom & pop stores out of business>> It is a legitimate way of doing business and gaining a market share fast. But there are risks that are inherent in this method. You need a huge warchest or a steady income to sustain loss-making prices or your prices may not be attractive enough. What does it mean for photographers? If a photographer charges way too low that costs cannot be recouped, the photographer needs to be sufficiently rich or to have a stable income to sustain the loss. If the photographer is sufficiently rich, one day, it will run dry or the industry will just crumble, leaving the photographer a monopoly (ideal situation) which the photographer may then raise prices since demand outstrip supply but doing that will just invite the low prices tactic from new competitors. If the photographer has a stable income, the photographer will not be able to take on too many jobs which shouldn't affect the market too much since there is another commitment. Either way, the photographer with a reputation of using this method will not be able to increase the prices without losing clients (unless a monopoly is obtained) because the reputation will be built on being a 'more affordable' photographer (I am not going to be drawn into the fight of whether such a photographer is skilled or not) and will attract such clients looking for that price range.
To be a good photographer, one must study fundamentals and techniques relating to photos and the art of it. To run a successful photography business, one must know the underlying fundamentals that affect all industries and to be able to apply them to the photography market. Protectionism is certainly a defensive mechanism that can be called upon but the economic states of countries practising protectionism leaves nothing to the imagination. You can be the judge of whether such methods work.
Personally, building a brand value is what I personally prefer but to each his own.
There are different client tiers out there and if one is able to sell oneself to a tier successfully and make money, who is to say that it is wrong? The absence of 'more affordable' photographers do not necessarily make the market conditions better. In fact, I will be bold enough to say that the presence of such photographers make photography services affordable and thus, clients who would otherwise not even be in the market will be able to try photography services at the price that they are comfortable, effectively expanding the market. These clients can either go to the next tier of photographers when they realise the 'more affordable' ones do not provide the right value at the price or remain status quo which higher tier photographers would in the first place not be able to serve anyway. Of course, some will also fade away. Likewise, some clients in the higher tier segments may move up, remain status quo or move down. This is the dynamics of most industries.
But regardless of which side of the fence you are on, just stay cool and enjoy what you are doing.
